Development of Creative Commons licenses

[drew Roberts <zotz AT 100jamz.com>]

On Thursday 09 August 2012 11:22:55 Francesco Poli wrote:
> Hello again,
> Section 3(b)(1)(C) of CC-by-sa-v4.0draft2 states:
>
> [...]
>
> >      (1) You must release the Adaptation under one of the following:
>
> [...]
>
> >          [or
> >          (C) a Creative Commons ported license (either this or a later
> >          license version) containing the same License Elements as this
> >          Public License],[Note] or
> >
> > [Note] Note that alternative (C) remains bracketed in this draft because
> > the question of porting for 4.0 is undecided and will be subject to
> > discussion upon publication of the next draft.
>
> [...]
>
> Once again, I personally suggest to *not* port v4.0 licenses to
> specific jurisdictions.  I think the right approach is striving to
> create international licenses that work well in as many jurisdictions
> as possible, without the need of porting them to each local
> jurisdiction.

If this is doable, and doable well, fine.
>
> I also reiterate the recommendation to introduce explicit one-way
> conversion clauses
>
>  * that allow redistribution of CC-by-sa-v4.0-licensed works under the
>    terms of the GNU GPL version 2 or any later version
>
>  * that allow redistribution of CC-by-v4.0-licensed works under the
>    terms of the zlib license:
>    http://www.gzip.org/zlib/zlib_license.html

No way, no how. This would be a disaster.

Working with the FSF to make future versions of CC BY-SA and the GPL 
compatible = GREAT.

The suggested one way compatibility = TERRIBLE.
>
> See my previous message [1] for more details.
>
> [1]
> https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/cc-licenses/2011-December/006512.html
>
> I hope these suggestions may be implemented in the next draft.

all the best,

drew